Legal Opinion · Dissent

Altman v. Meridian Township

Michigan Supreme Court

Decided June 8, 1992No. 90316, (Calendar No. 7)Published

1DissentRiley, J.

This case arises out of the rejection by defendants township and township *643board of a plat submitted by plaintiffs-developer. Because I believe that the township lacked authority to reject the plat pursuant, to the Subdivision Control Act, I would affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals reversing the grant of summary disposition in favor of defendants and remanding to the trial court.

I dissent from my colleagues because SCA § 182(4)(a)1 provides for rejection by the governing body of a plat that "is isolated from or which isolates other lands from existing public streets, unless suitable…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Arrowhead Development Co. v. Livingston County Road CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Carlson v. City of TroyMichigan Court of Appeals · 1979
  3. Eyde Construction Co. v. Charter Township of MeridianMichigan Court of Appeals · 1986
  4. CPW Investments 2 v. City of TroyMichigan Court of Appeals · 1986
  5. Eversdyk v. Wyoming City CouncilMichigan Court of Appeals · 1988

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API